REPORTS OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRAL AWARDS RECUEIL DES SENTENCES ARBITRALES The Pious Fund Case (United States of America v. Mexico) 14 October 1902 VOLUME IX pp. 1-14 NATIONS UNIES - UNITED NATIONS Copyright (c) 2006 XV THE PIOUS FUND CASE PARTIES: United States of America v. Mexico. COMPROMIS: Protocol of Agreement, 22 May, 1902. ARBITRATORS: Permanent Court of Arbitration: Edward Fry, De Martens, T.M.C. Asser, A. F. de Savornin Lohman, Henning Matzen. AWARD: 14 October, 1902. The claim of the United States of America in the case known as "the Pious Fund of the Californias" is governed by the principle of res judicata—The rules of prescrip- tion, belonging exclusively to the domain of civil law, cannot be applied to the pre- sent dispute between the two States in litigation—Payment in gold cannot be ex- acted except by virtue of an express stipulation—Question of the mode of payment does not relate to the basis of the right in litigation, but only to the execution of the BIBLIOGRAPHY A. M. Stuyt, Survey of International Arbitrations, 1794-1938, The Hague, 1939. p. 256. Texts of the Compromis, Award and other documents relating to the Case: Bureau international de la Cour permanente d'Arbitrage, Recueil des Actes et Protocoles concernant le litige du "Fonds Pieux des Calif or nies" soumis au Tribunal d'Arbitrage constitué en vertu du Traité conclu à Washington le 22 mai 1902 entre les Etats-Unis d'Amérique et les Etats-Unis Mexicains, La Haye, Van Langen- huysen Frères, 1902 (officiai publication), p. 5 [English and Spanish texts of the Compromis]; p. 107 [French text of the Award]. American Journal of International Law, vol. 2, 1908, pp. 893, 898 [English texts of the Compromis and Award]. British and Foreign State Papers, vol. 95, p. 973 [English texts of the Compromis and Award]. Baron Descamps et Louis Renault. Recueil international des traités du XX' siècle, année 1902, Paris, p. 461 [English, French and Spanish texts of the Compromis]; p. 470 [French text of the Award]. Le premier arbitrage de la Cour de la Haye, Les fondations californiennes tt la question de la chose jugée en droit international, plaidoirie de M. le chevalier Descamps. Conseil des Etats-Unis d'Amérique, Bruxelles, 1902 [with French texts of the Compromis and Award]. Journal du droit international privé et dt la jurisprudence comparée, t. 30, 1903, p. 694 [French text of the Award], William M. Malloy, Treaties, Conventions, International Acts, Protocols and Agreements between the United States of America and Other Powers, 1776-1909, vol. I, Washington, 1910, p. 1194 [English text of the Compromis]. De Martens, Nouveau Recueil général de traités, 2e série, t. XXXII, Leipzig, 1905, p. 189 [English text of the Compromis] ; p. 193 [French text of the Award]. Papers relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States (1902), United States \&, Mexico in the matter of the Case of the Pious Fund of Californias, Washington. 1903, Appendix II, p. 857 [French text of the Award]. Report of Jackson H. Ralston, Agent of the United States and of Counsel m the matter of the Pious Fund of Californias, with Pleadings, Appendix, Exhibits, Briefs, and Record of the entire Proceedings, Washington, 1902 [with, in Part I, p. 13, English text of the Award]. Repûblica Mexicana, Secretaria de Relaciones Exteriores, Reclamaciôn del Gobierno de los Estados Unidos de America contra Mexico respecto del Fondo Piadoso de las Californias, Documentos principales relativos, Mexico, 1903 [including Spanish texts of the Compromis and Award]. Revue générale de droit international public, t. IX, 1902, Documents, p. 24 [French text of the Award]. 2 The Hague Couit Reports, edited by J. B. Scott, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, New Yoik, Oxford University Press, 1st series, 1916, p. 3 [English texts of the Compromis and Award] ; p. 429 [French text of the Award] ; p. 432 [Spanish text of the Compromis]. Ernst Schmitz, A. H. Feller, Digest of the Decisions of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, 1902-1908, Berlin, 1931, p. 201 [English and Spanish texts of the Compromis]. U.S. Statutes at Large, vol. 32, p. 1916 [English text of the Compromis]. George Grafton Wilson. The Hague Arbitration Cases, Boston and London, 1915, p. 1 [English texts of the Compromis and Award]. Commentaries : K. S. Carlston, The Process of International Arbitration, Columbia University Press, New York 1946, pp. 11. 14, 33. 170. 235. E. Descamps, Conseil des Etats-Unis d'Amérique. Mémoire sur le fonctionnement du premier tribunal d'arbitrage constitué au sein de la Cour permanente d'Arbitrage. Louvain. 1903. M. J. P. A. François. " La Cour permanente d'Arbitrage, son origine, sa jurisprudence, son avenir ", Recueil des Cours, 1955. I, p. 481. Lauterpacht, Private Law Sources and Analogies of International Law, 1927, p. 249. Edgar de Melville, L'oeuvre de la Haye (1871-1921) Exposé du travail des confé- rences de La Haye et de la Cour permanente d'Arbitrage, Leyde, 1924, p. 90. Oppenheim, International Law, 7th éd., I, p. 315. W. L. Penfield, " The Hague Court in the Pious Fund Arbitration ", Repoil of the Eighth Annual Meeting of the Lake Mohonk Conference on International Arbitration, 1903, reported by W. J. Rose, pp. 83-90. M. R. Pinto, " La prescription en droit international ", Recueil des Cours, 1955. l,p. 440. Jackson H. Ralston, " Some suggestions as to the Permanent Court of Arbi- tration ". American Journal of International Law, vol. I, Part I, 1907, p. 321. Louis Renault, " Un premier litige devant la Cour d'Arbitrage de La Haye ", Annales de l'Ecole des sciences politiques, 18e année, 1903, pp. 38-74. J. B. Scott. Der Kalifornische Kirchengùterstreit zwischen den Vereinigten Staaten von America und Mexiko, Dos werk vom Haag, 2 Série, I, teil 1, pp. 45-247 [including the German text of the Compromis and the French text of the Award]. M. Sibert, Traité de Droit international public, Paris 1951, t. I, p. 338 James L. Tryon. The Hague Peace System in operation, Tale Law Journal, vol. XXI, November 1911-1912, p. 41. SYLLABUS1 The case on trial was known as the " Pious Fund of the Californias ". It originated in donations made by Spanish subjects during the latter part of the seventeenth and the first half of the eighteenth centuries for the spread of the Roman Catholic faith in the Californias. These gifts, amounting approxi- mately to $ 1,700,000, were made in trust to the Society ofjesus for the execution of the pious wish of the founders. The Jesuits accepted the trust and discharged its duties until they were disabled from its further administration by their expulsion in 1767 from the Spanish dominions by the King of Spain and by the suppression of the order by the Pope in 1773. The Crown of Spain took possession of and administered the trust for the uses declared by the donors until Mexico, after her independence was achieved, succeeded to the adminis- tration of the trust. Finally, in 1842, President Santa Anna ordered the properties to be sold, that the proceeds thereof be incorporated into the national treasury, and that six per cent annual interest on the capitalization of the property should be paid and devoted to the carrying out of the intention of the donors in the conversion and civilization of the savages. Upper California having been ceded to the United States in 1848 by the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, the Mexican Government refused to pay to the prelates of the Church in Upper California any share of the interest which accrued after the ratification of the treaty. The latter presented their claims therefor to the Department of State. A mixed commission for the settlement of the cross claims between the two Governments was formed under the Convention of July 4, 1868.2 On the presentation and hearing of the claim the LTnited States and Mexican commissioners divided in opinion.3 The case was accordingly referred to the umpire, Sir Edward Thornton, who rendered an award 4 in favor of the United States for twenty-one annuities of S 43,050.99 each, as the equitable proportion to which the prelates of Upper California were entitled of the interest accrued on the entire fund from the making of the treaty of peace down to February 2, 1869. The Mexican Government paid the award, but asserting that (he claim was extinguished, refused to make any further payments of interest for the benefit of the Church in Upper California. Again the prelates appealed to the Department of State for support, and in 1898 active diplomatic discussions between the two Governments as to the merits of the claim were begun and carried forward until they culminated, on May 22, 1902, in a formal agreement to refer the case to the determination of the Hague tribunal to be composed of five members none of whom were to be natives or citizens of the contracting Parties. Only two issues were presented by the protocol, namely: 1. Is the case, as a consequence of the decision of Sir Edward Thornton, within the governing principle of res judicata? 2. If not, is the claim just? The tribunal was authorized to render whatever judgment might be found just and equitable. 1 The Hague Court Reports, edited by J. B. Scott, Carnegie Endowment for Inter- national Peace, New York, Oxford University Press, 1st series, 1916, pp. 1-2. 2 Ibid., pp. 12-17. 'Ibid., pp. 16-48. i Ibid., pp. 48-54; see also Moore, International Arbitrations, vol. II, 1898, p. 1350. 6 UNITED STATES/MEXICO As judges the United States selected Professor Martens of Russia and Sir Edward Fry of Great Britain; Mexico chose Dr.